Genotype × environment interaction is weaker in genitalia than in mating signals and body traits in Enchenopa treehoppers (Hemiptera: Membracidae)

Genetica

Volumn 139, Issue 7, 2011, Pages 871-884

  Rodríguez, Rafael L ^a   Al Wathiqui, Nooria ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE   (United States)

^b TUFTS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Developmental plasticity; Maintenance of genetic variation; Phytophagous insect

Indexed keywords

ENCHENOPA; ENCHENOPA BINOTATA; HEMIPTERA; HEXAPODA; MEMBRACIDAE;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BODY SIZE; ENVIRONMENT; EVOLUTION; GENETIC SELECTION; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENETICS; GENITAL SYSTEM; GENOTYPE; GENOTYPE ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION; HEMIPTERA; HISTOLOGY; MALE; MATE CHOICE; PHYSIOLOGY; REPRODUCTION; RUTACEAE; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMALS; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; BODY SIZE; ENVIRONMENT; GENE-ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION; GENETIC VARIATION; GENITALIA; GENOTYPE; HEMIPTERA; LINEAR MODELS; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; REPRODUCTION; RUTACEAE; SELECTION, GENETIC;

EID: 79960838271     PISSN: 00166707     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10709-011-9591-z     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Al-Wathiqui N, Rodríguez RL (2011) Allometric slopes not underestimated by Ordinary Least Squares regression: a case study with Enchenopa treehoppers (Hemiptera: Membracidae). Ann Ent Soc Am 104: 562-566.
2. Andrade CAC, Vieira RD, Ananina G, Klaczko LB (2009) Evolution of the male genitalia: morphological variation of the aedeagi in a natural population of Drosophila mediopunctata. Genetica 135: 13-23.
3. Arnqvist G, Thornhill R (1998) Evolution of animal genitalia: patterns of phenotypic and genotypic variation and condition dependence of genital and non-genital morphology in water strider (Heteroptera: Gerridae: Insecta). Genet Res Camb 71: 193-212.
4. Bonduriansky R (2007) Sexual selection and allometry: a critical reappraisal of the evidence and ideas. Evolution 61: 838-849.
5. Borgia G (1979) Sexual selection and the evolution of mating systems. In: Blum MS, Blum NA (eds) Sexual selection and reproductive competition. Academic Press, NY, pp 19-80.
6. Brakefield PM (2006) Evo-devo and contraints on selection. Trends Ecol Evol 21: 362-368.
7. Bussière LF, Hunt J, Stölting KN, Jennions MD, Brooks R (2008) Mate choice for genetic quality when environments vary: suggestions for empirical progress. Genetica 134: 69-78.
8. Cocroft RB, Rodríguez RL, Hunt RE (2008) Host shifts, the evolution of communication and speciation in the Enchenopa binotata complex of treehoppers. In: Tilmon K (ed) Specialization, speciation, and radiation: the evolutionary biology of herbivorous insects. University of California Press, Berkeley, pp 88-100.
9. Cocroft RB, Rodríguez RL, Hunt RE (2010) Host shifts and signal divergence: mating signals covary with host use in a complex of specialized plant-feeding insects. Biol J Linn Soc 99: 60-72.
10. Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey.
11. Cotton S, Fowler K, Pomiankowski A (2004) Do sexual ornaments demonstrate heightened condition-dependent expression as predicted by the handicap hypotheses? Proc R Soc Lond B 271: 771-783.
12. de Visser JAGM, Hermisson J, Wagner GP, Meyers LA, Bagheri-Chaichian H, Blanchard JL, Chao L, Cheverud JM, Elena SF, Fontana W, Gibson G, Hansen TF, Krakauer D, Lewontin RC, Ofria C, Rice SH, von Dassow G, Wagner A, Whitlock MC (2003) Evolution and detection of genetic robustness. Evolution 57: 1959-1972.
13. Flatt T (2005) The evolutionary genetics of canalization. Q Rev Biol 80: 287-316.
14. Fry JD (1992) The mixed-model analysis of variance applied to quantitative genetics: biological meaning of the parameters. Evolution 46: 540-550.
15. Greenfield MD, Rodríguez RL (2004) Genotype-environment interaction and the reliability of mating signals. Anim Behav 68: 1461-1468.
16. Hamilton KGA, Cocroft RB (2009) Establishing the identity of existing names in the North American Enchenopa binotata species complex of treehoppers (Hemiptera: Membracidae). Entomol News 120: 554-565.
17. Hansen TF (2006) The evolution of genetic architecture. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 37: 123-157.
18. Higgins SL, Hosken DJ, Wedell N (2009) Phenotypic and genetic variation in male genitalia in the seedbug, Lygaeus equestris (Heteroptera). Biol J Linn Soc 98: 400-405.
19. Hill GE (2011) Condition-dependent traits as signals of the functionality of vital cellular processes. Ecol Lett (in press).
20. Houle D (1992) Comparing evolvability and variability of quantitative traits. Genetics 130: 195-204.
21. House CM, Simmons LW (2007) No evidence for condition-dependent expression of male genitalia in the dung beetle Onthophagus taurus. J Evol Biol 20: 1322-1332.
22. Hunt J, Bussière L, Jennions MD, Brooks R (2004) What is genetic quality? Trends Ecol Evol 19: 329-333.
23. Ingleby FC, Hunt J, Hosken DJ (2010) The role of genotype-by-environment interactions in sexual selection. J Evol Biol 23: 2031-2045.
24. Kamimura Y, Iwase R (2010) Evolutionary genetics of genital size and lateral asymmetry in the earwig Euborellia plebeja (Dermpatera: Anisolabididae). Biol J Linn Soc 101: 103-112.
25. Kemp DJ, Rutowski RL (2007) Genetics, and the potential signal content of iridescent ultraviolet butterfly coloration. Evolution 61: 168-183.
26. Kokko H, Heubel K (2008) Condition-dependence, genotype-by-environment interactions and the lek paradox. Genetica 132: 209-216.
27. Lynch M, Walsh B (1998) Genetics and analysis of quantitative traits. Sinauer, Massachusetts.
28. Miller LK, Brooks R (2005) The effects of genotype, age, and social environment on male ornamentation, mating behavior, and attractiveness. Evolution 59: 2414-2425.
29. Mills C, Alatalo RV, Koskela E, Mappes J, Oksanen TA (2007) Signal reliability compromised by genotype-by-environment interaction and potential mechanisms for its preservation. Evolution 61: 1748-1757.
30. Moran MD (2003) Arguments for rejecting the sequential Bonferroni in ecological studies. Oikos 100: 403-405.
31. Nakagawa S, Cuthill I (2007) Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists. Biol. Revs 82: 591-605.
32. Ostrowski M-F, Jarne P, David P (2000) Quantitative genetics of sexual plasticity: the environmental threshold model and genotype-by-environment interaction for phallus development in the snail Bulinus truncatus. Evolution 54: 1614-1625.
33. Pratt G, Wood TK (1993) Genitalic analysis of males and females in the Enchenopa binotata (Say) complex (Membracidae: Homoptera). Proc Entomol Soc Wash 95: 574-582.
34. Radwan J (2008) Maintenance of genetic variation in sexual ornaments: a review of the mechanisms. Genetica 134: 113-127.
35. Rasband WS (1997-2009) ImageJ, U. S. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda. http://rsb. info. nih. gov/ij.
36. Rodríguez RL, Sullivan LE, Cocroft RB (2004) Vibrational communication and reproductive isolation in the Enchenopa binotata species complex of treehoppers (Hemiptera: Membracidae). Evolution 58: 571-578.
37. Rodríguez RL, Ramaswamy K, Cocroft RB (2006) Evidence that female preferences have shaped male signal evolution in a clade of specialized plant-feeding insects. Proc R Soc B 273: 2585-2593.
38. Rodríguez RL, Sullivan LM, Snyder RL, Cocroft RB (2008) Host shifts and the beginning of signal divergence. Evolution 62: 12-20.
39. Roff DA (1997) Evolutionary quantitative genetics. Chapman & Hall, New York.
40. Roff DA (2002) Life history evolution. Sinauer, Massachusetts.
41. Rosenthal R (1991) Meta-analytic procedures for social research. Applied social research methods series, vol 6. Revised edition. SAGE Publications, Newbury Park.
42. Rowe L, Houle D (1996) The lek paradox and the capture of genetic variance by condition dependent traits. Proc R Soc Lond B 263: 1415-1421.
43. Schulte-Hostedde AI, Zinner B, Millar JS, Hickling GJ (2005) Restitution of mass-size residuals: validating body condition indices. Ecology 86: 155-163.
44. Service PM, Rose MR (1985) Genetic covariation among life-history components: the effect of novel environments. Evolution 39: 943-945.
45. Sgrò CM, Hoffmann AA (2004) Genetic correlations, tradeoffs and environmental variation. Heredity 93: 241-248.
46. Stearns S, de Jong G, Newman B (1991) The effects of phenotypic plasticity on genetic correlations. Trends Ecol Evol 6: 122-126.
47. Steppan SJ, Phillips PC, Houle D (2002) Comparative quantitative genetics: evolution of the G matrix. Trends Ecol Evol 17: 320-327.
48. Stirling DG, Réale D, Roff D (2002) Selection, structure and the heritability of behaviour. J Evol Biol 15: 277-289.
49. Sullivan-Beckers L, Cocroft RB (2010) The importance of female choice, male-male competition, and signal transmission as causes of selection on male mating signals. Evolution 64: 3158-3171.
50. Tomkins JL, Radwan J, Kotiaho JS, Tregenza T (2004) Genic capture and resolving the lek paradox. Trends Ecol Evol 19: 323-327.
51. Via S, Conner J (1995) Evolution in heterogeneous environments: genetic variability within and across different grains in Tribolium castaneum. Heredity 74: 80-90.
52. Via S, Lande R (1985) Genotype-environment interaction and the evolution of phenotypic plasticity. Evolution 39: 505-522.
53. Via S, Lande R (1987) Evolution of genetic variability in a spatially heterogeneous environment: effects of genotype-environment interaction. Genet Res Camb 49: 147-156.
54. West-Eberhard MJ (2003) Developmental plasticity and evolution. Oxford University Press, NY.
55. Wood TK (1993) Speciation of the Enchenopa binotata complex (Insecta: Homoptera: Membracidae). In: Lees DR, Edwards D (eds) Evolutionary patterns and processes. Academic Press, NY, pp 299-317.
56. Zeng Z-B, Liu J, Stam LF, Kao C-H, Mercer JM, Laurie CC (2000) Genetic architecture of a morphological shape difference between two Drosophila species. Genetics 154: 299-310.